ok ... not new ... rather old and increased.

So the Fiscal Cliff Bill Protects 'the 99 Percent' From Income-Tax Hikes? Hardly

there was a "racist" "joke" about the NAACP.  It stood for N****s Ain't Actin' like Colored People.

Well.  They ain't.

Missed the "BBVA Compass" Bowl - celebrating America's long tradition of producting BBVA Compasses, I reckon.

Tonight we have the domain registration bowl.  Kent (not Kent State) Flashes vs Arkansas State Red Wolves (not The Tribe) This should actually be a close game.  The Tribe of Wolves is favored by three.  I expect them to win but Kent (NOT State) to cover.

Then there's a game tomorrow night.  Ho Hum.  I'm pulling for the Golden Domers but ONLY because they're playing an SEC team.  Tide is giving 8+-9.  I'd take the Bama's to win, Irish to cover.

Elsewhere, what MIGHT have been.  Purely conjectural.  Much has been made of the Big? lousy bowl performance, as it is every season, but keep in mnd MOST teams were playing two slots higher than they shouda been.  Here, then, is a rough analysis of what might have been.

1.  OSU beats Nebraska in the title game.  Goes to the Rose Bowl.  Still loses to Stanford.

2.  Nebraska still loses to UGA in the Citrus Bowl

3.  Penn State goes to the Middle Brow Steakhouse Bowl instead of that school up north.  Still loses to SC

4.  Wisconsin gets to play in the Gator Bowl and beats Mississippi State even worse than NU did.

5.  The BWW Bowl would've gotten the school up north who still woulda beaten TCU.

6.  The Automobil Maintenance Bowl woulda gotten NU and a win over TT instead of bungled clock management.

7.  MSU instead of Pud U in the Warm Up for the Cotton Bowl Bowl.   Still a loss, but single digits.

8.  And the Cheap Pizza Bowl woulda had Minnie Ha Ha isntead of Western Kentucky.    And a nice 10 point Big? win.

4-4.  MUCH better than 2-5.  

A great article was published this week in Forbes, and the author, David John Marotta, does a fantastic job of explaining income disparity and why President Obama’s disdain for “the rich” is actually driving that disparity.  It’s worth a full read, but here’s a quick excerpt:

Imagine the tax code is a flat 25% tax. Now picture a situation where a business owner pays her 20 employees a gross salary of $50,000. Having put massive amounts of capital into the business, the owner receives a gross salary and a profit five times what her employees make, or $250,000.

Each employee pays $12,500 in taxes (25%) and nets an income of $37,500. The owner pays $62,500 (25%) and receives a net income five times that of the employees, or $187,500…

Assume that these numbers are fair according to the economics of supply and demand, but now the government is going to single out the rich to pay more taxes and relieve the middle class of paying their fair share. In fact, we are going to let the workers enjoy a tax rate of zero while we heap their share of taxes onto the company owner.

Each worker paid $12,500 in taxes. With 20 workers that means the owner must pay an extra $250,000. To pay this tax and still receive the same net pay, the owner has to pay herself twice her old salary. Now, instead of grossing $250,000 and netting $187,500, she must gross $500,000 to net the same amount. Her effective tax rate will be 62.5%.

But where will she get the extra $250,000? She will have to reduce her employees’ salaries from $50,000 to $37,500…

Of course, no one needs to be told about President Obama’s problem with the concept of math, but this article underscores why liberal logic just doesn’t add up.  Liberals try to create income parity by taking more from those that produce, but in the end, it simply creates further disparity.  Why not lessen the tax burden on businesses, allow them to create more jobs, and in turn, more taxpayers, thus boosting revenues?

From the Independent’s most cited article: Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past by Charles Onians:

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become “a very rare and exciting event”.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said.

It seems despite the sage advice from that East Anglia CRU scientist, a new record for snowfall has been set for the month of December.

From the Rutgers University Snow Lab, we have this graph for the Northern Hemisphere for all months of December. December 2012 was a clear winner.

Source: http://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcover/chart_anom.php?ui_set=1&ui_region=nhland&ui_month=12

another?

British activist Mark Lynas  now admits that he was wrong when declared that biotech crops posed significant risks to people and the natural world. In a speech delivered yesterday at the Oxford Farming Conference Lynas declared:

I want to start with some apologies. For the record, here and upfront, I apologise for having spent several years ripping up GM crops. I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid 1990s, and that I thereby assisted in demonising an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment.

As an environmentalist, and someone who believes that everyone in this world has a right to a healthy and nutritious diet of their choosing, I could not have chosen a more counter-productive path. I now regret it completely.

So I guess you’ll be wondering – what happened between 1995 and now that made me not only change my mind but come here and admit it? Well, the answer is fairly simple: I discovered science, and in the process I hope I became a better environmentalist.

And one I wish I'd seen before I spent 10 days with my eco-terrorist inlaws: 

I Call Them 'Bat-Chomping, Bird-Slicing Eco Crucifixes' Because They ARE Bat-Chomping, Bird-Slicing Eco Crucifixes

tried this last year and failed miserably.  So here's what I'm gonna try - a simple list, bottom up, of my top 100 movies of all time with perhaps some minimal commentary.  Keep in mind that a movie may move up or down during the year.  And each month I'll also highlight one of my top 10.

So - starting at

100. The Awful Truth  a nice screwball comedy

99. The Spanish Prisoner Steve Martin takes a serious turn.  Need to rewatch this one

98.  Anatomy of a Murder the first courtroom drama on the list, but not the last

97. Fat Head The common sense response to Supersize Me.

96. Swing Time Astaire and Rogers fun

95. The Music Man one of those great musicals on my bucket list that I'm probably too old to ever do, and one of the first stage productions I ever saw.

94.  Atlas Shrugged: Part I OK, not THAT great a movie, but it ranks this high for purely political philosophy reasons.

93. Unforgiven A truly great western.

92. Run Lola Run first foreign language film on the list.  Interesting examination of the everyday.

91. Pan's Labyrinth Billy DT's classic.

Fast forward to January 3, 2013, when House Republicans voted to retain  Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) to be speaker of the House in the 113th Congress by a vote of 95% - 5%. Covering the story this afternoon, Bresnahan and colleague Jake Sherman sought to simultaneously argue that Boehner faced an uphill struggle to hold on to power.

FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year than Rifles

In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618. 

And so the list goes, with the actual numbers changing somewhat from year to year, yet the fact that more people are killed with blunt objects each year remains constant.

For example, in 2011, there was 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs. 

While the FBI makes is clear that some of the "murder by rifle" numbers could be adjusted up slightly, when you take into account murders with non-categorized types of guns, it does not change the fact that their annual reports consistently show more lives are taken each year with these blunt objects than are taken with Feinstein's dreaded rifle.

Another interesting fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles.

The bottom line: A rifle ban is as illogical as it is unconstitutional. We face far greater danger from individuals armed with carpenters' tools and a caveman's stick. 

And it seems fairly obvious that if more people had a gun, less people would be inclined to try to hit them in the head with a hammer.

I'm teaching Real Estate Law winter quarter (starts in two weeks) and doing some refersher work.  I was in the industry from 90-95 or so and remember the CRA being debated.  Lots of lefties insist that it had NOTHING to do with the meltdown.  I show them this:

Want more?  Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) Lead to Risky Lending?

and